Feral Jundi

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Industry Talk: Contractors And Iraq Defense–The Next Vinnell Arabia?

Iraq has ordered or requested more than $13 billion worth of U.S. arms, as well as a shipment of 18 F-16s, which aren’t expected to arrive at least until 2013 even if the order receives swift congressional approval.

“It’s inevitable,” he said. “We have equipment such as tanks, aircraft, naval equipment, and it’s all coming from the United States. They won’t be fully ready until 2016, so how are we going to train on them? By mail? We will need the help of specialists and experts and trainers and those people are going to need life support and force protection.”

Otherwise, he added, “all the expenses I paid for … will be in vain.” 

*****

The issue of a continuing American presence is politically sensitive in Baghdad and Washington. No Iraqi politician seeking to head the next government could risk calling for the U.S. military, which led the 2003 invasion of their country, to stay longer. The faction loyal to radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada Sadr, whose support could prove crucial to any future government, opposed the agreement that allowed U.S. troops to stay as long as 2011, and has said it will not back any government that permits them to stay any longer. 

*****

     I stumbled upon this article the other day while doing my research and this jumped out at me.  As you can see with the two quotes up top, as well as what the article as a whole was discussing, we are in a very peculiar situation in Iraq.  We have given them all of this American hardware like the F-16 or the M-1 Abrams, and yet politically we are unable to stick around to make sure the Iraqis can take care of the stuff.  Enter the contractor.

     With that said, one could say that contractors will not only be important to the DoS mission or the oil companies, but also to the defense companies doing business with the Iraqi MoD.  The companies that make this hardware will need a place to stay that is safe, they will need protection they can depend upon, and those protectors will have to be folks that know the ins and outs of Iraq. Security contractors will be very important in these early transition years.

    Not only that, but armies like the Iraqi Army, whom are trained to western standards will undoubtedly need more western ways of warfare ‘tune ups’.  It is not enough to give them a tank, an APC, or jet and call it a day.  They need to know maintenance, strategy, limits and capabilities, etc.–and all of that requires a western trainer who can hold their hand and give them guidance. Think Vinnell Arabia, but in Iraq.(a defense company that has been training Saudi Arabia’s military for years) Hell, it wouldn’t surprise me if Vinnell Arabia was called upon to be that company to provide these services in Iraq.

    The next point is time frame.  As American and European equipment continues to saturate the Iraq defense stockpile, we have essentially created a self perpetuating business relationship between Iraq and the west. We basically create their dependence on the stuff.  This general below mentioned several dates like 2016 or 2020, but realistically Iraq will need this kind of support for as long as they have a military dependent on this equipment.  And if they ever were able to optimize their oil production and make profit off of it, I believe they will take somewhat of the same path as Saudi Arabia when it comes to defense. (lots of current equipment and quality trainers to go with) Of course this scenario would take a bit to get to that point, but you get the idea.  The relationship between private industry and Iraq defense will be a constant over the years, just as long as Iraq’s defense depends upon western military hardware and know how, and they have neighbors that they consider to be ‘external threats’.

    The final point is that we are also building Afghanistan’s defense and they too will need help with it well after the war is over. Not to mention that Afghanistan and the US is becoming more politically sensitive when it comes to troop deployments. Contractors who know Afghanistan will be important as well.  Of course we are not at this phase yet, but you get the idea and it is definitely something to think about. Interesting stuff. –Matt

——————————————————————-

Iraqi official foresees a U.S. military presence until 2016

Baghdad is buying American military gear and weapons, which have yet to arrive. U.S. forces must stay to train Iraqis on how to use them, Defense Minister Abdul Qader Obeidi says.

September 08, 2010

By Liz Sly

Some form of U.S. military presence will be needed in Iraq at least until 2016 to provide training, support and maintenance for the vast quantity of military equipment and weaponry that Iraq is buying from America, Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul Qader Obeidi said.

In addition, Iraq will continue to need help with intelligence gathering after 2011, and the fledgling Iraqi air force will require U.S. assistance at least until 2020, the date by which Iraq aims to achieve the capability to defend its airspace, Obeidi said.

The comments were made in an interview a week after President Obama declared the end of U.S. combat operations and reaffirmed America’s commitment to pull out all its troops by the end of 2011, under the terms of a security agreement reached by the Bush administration and the Iraqi government in 2008.

(more…)

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Strategy: Suicide Assaulters, Swarming, And Toyotas–The Taliban And The New Rules Of War

Rule 1: “Many and Small” Beats “Few and Large.”

Rule 2: Finding Matters More Than Flanking.

Rule 3: Swarming Is the New Surging.

*****

   This latest suicide assaulter attack in Afghanistan is important to look at and study, and this post is dedicated to ‘knowing your enemy’.  Tim over at Free Range International just posted an excellent run down of this latest attack in Nimroz at the governor’s compound, and Bill Roggio over at Long Wars Journal has some excellent stuff on this incident as well. I highly advise reading Tim’s post, because it comes with pictures and diagrams of the assault, along with Tim’s commentary on the whole thing.

   As you can see, these guys are following a path that John Arquilla and others have laid out with the ‘new rules of war’. They are continuing to use this same type of attack, just because it is so hard to defend against and it causes so much chaos and confusion.  The only thing working against the enemy is their ability to be organized and plan this stuff better.  But some attacks have been successful, and they are learning. What I wanted to do in this post is match up what the enemy is doing with these three new rules I listed up top, and discuss their effectiveness.

     Multiple assaulters armed with AK’s and suicide vests, are the many and small.  Plus, with the suicide vest and AK, the assaulter has multiple options for killing.  They can fight their way into concentrations of enemies, and blow up when close enough (finding). The human bomb can also identify specific targets, and detonate just close enough to kill them. They can also use their suicide vest to clear obstacles so other assaulters can punch in and shoot at people or detonate(swarming).  But as Tim has pointed out in his post about the subject, these latest assaulters were not that organized or effective.  My guess is that they were poorly trained and prepared for the mission at hand, which is a good thing for us. And of course they are poor shots, as Tim and others have pointed out, which is also a good thing.

   But the next angle of this attack is the idea of using Toyota pickups and swarming, in order to arrive on target and overwhelm the defenders.  This is exactly how the Taliban was operating and it deserves closer inspection.  Tim mentioned in his write up that large vehicles really cannot move around in Nimroz, just because of the small streets and power lines all over the place.  You either have to have a small truck, motorcycle, or be walking in order to get around in places like this.  And as the Toyota Horde paper pointed out, small pickups can be a tactical advantage for attackers who are swarming or preparing a battlefield for the defense. They are cheap, you can use many of them, and they are great for all types of utilitarian activities for hybrid warfare.  The Taliban continue to use these small pickup in places that MRAPs cannot go, and they can also use those pickups or motorcycles to outrun our large lumbering vehicles and forces.  They can also blend in with the local population, because they all use pickups.

   Further more, small pickups are essential for swarming operations.  If you want to get a truck load of assaulters into position, and not cause too much attention, the pickup is perfect because it is low profile (meaning there are many of these in the attack area).  Or they could use taxis, cop cars and ambulances as delivery vehicles.  The key here is just getting into position so the assaulters can pour out and attack the target from multiple angles.  Small vehicles that blend in are the perfect tool for delivery in this case.

   What further adds to the attack, chaos, and blending in factor, is assaulters wearing police or soldier uniforms.  These types of attacks can be extremely confusing, and they work great for the assaulter.  They can also do secondary attacks as the real police and military show up, and it is all about blending into that chaotic environment to create as much chaos as possible.  That is another reason why it is essential for defenders to get to know the local police and army stations really well, so they can recognize who should be on scene and shouldn’t.  Still, this is very tough to defend against, and the enemy knows this.  ‘Finding’ in this case, is extremely critical if we want to succeed in the defense, because combatants that look like cops or soldiers could be causing a whole slew of problems.

   The swarming attack, coupled with the population camouflage I mentioned, is one of those deals that works well because it confuses the defender and brings a whole lot of chaos in a short period of time.  And with assaulters that double as human breachers that blow apart gates (with their bodies strapped with bombs), the swarming attack becomes even more feasible and more lethal.  It just takes really good planning and rehearsal for the enemy to accomplish the mission.

   Finally, I want to give solutions to countering these types of attacks.  The one thing that really screws up planning for these attacks, is the unexpected.  Being random and doing things that no one expected, is definitely one way to counter these types of attacks.  Also having excellent SOP’s to cover these types of swarming attacks is highly advisable, along with drilling over and over again to get proficient.  To also war game all and any scenarios in your head, and talking it up with your fellow guards is another way to keep sharp.  You should have answers in your head for all types of scenarios.  Red teams are great tools to find out how an enemy might attack a facility, and those red teams should do all they can to mimic what the enemy is doing today.

    For simmunitions developers out there, maybe building a paintball suicide vest for red teams would be a good product to sell? (it could already be out there for sale?)  Red teams could simulate fighting their way into your position, and detonate the suicide vest as part of the assault.  We have to start thinking about enemy assaulters as dual weapon systems–they shoot, fight their way in, and are seeking human pockets or obstacles to blow up. We also have to expect that suicide vests will also have plates in them, in order to make the assaulter tougher to kill.  The plates also help to focus the blast outward, and further turn the assaulter into a human claymore. Stuff to think about, and our enemy’s tactics and strategy are definitely evolving–Joker eat your heart out. –Matt

——————————————————————-

Taliban hits government compound

May 05, 2010

At least eight attempted suicide bombers have been killed during a gun battle with police in southwestern Afghanistan, the interior ministry said.

Ministry officials said at least two Afghan policemen were also killed and five others wounded before the fighting ended in Nimroz province on Wednesday.

One witness said a female local council member was also killed in the attack.

Musa Rasooli, a senior police official in Nimroz, said the fighters were targeting the provincial governor’s compound and had entered the governor’s office.

He said two suicide bombers had blown themselves up outside the compound.

‘Taliban responsible’

The interior ministry said the fighters had also targeted civilian buildings in Zaranj, the provincial capital.

“A group of terrorists attacked some civilian and government buildings this morning in Zaranj,” Zemarai Bashary, an interior ministry spokesman, said.

(more…)

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Strategy: Van Creveld, Nagl, Bacevich, Hammes, Echevarria–All Star Strategy Conference

Filed under: Cool Stuff,Strategy,Video — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 2:26 AM

Monday, April 26, 2010

Strategy: The Defense Of Farms And Ranches

Filed under: Strategy — Tags: , , , , , — Matt @ 4:10 AM

   This is a good little post on a subject you don’t hear much about, yet is pretty important to today’s ranchers and farmers along the border with Mexico, or to farmers who are caught in the middle of conflicts throughout the world.  If you look at farms and ranches as a strategic asset of a nation, as do many nations throughout the world do, then defending such places becomes pretty important.  The food of a country comes from these farms, as does the vitality of the economy of some countries.  If an enemy is attacking farms, or soldiers from other wars are crossing a border and raiding farms in order to survive or smuggle weapons or drugs, then that is a direct threat to a nation’s vital resource and citizens. It must be addressed, if a country cares about protecting this economic asset.

   One of the big problems with defending farms and ranches, is the size of the operation.  Ideally a government would help in the defense of these businesses, but for some nations, it just isn’t feasible.  Cost might be a factor, or a lack of manpower might be another factor.  Even politics can limit how much help these farmers and ranchers can get (like with the Mexico/U.S. immigration problem, and the politics that surround that)

   All of that aside, the farmer or rancher still has to protect their land and business (and their lives), and that task becomes increasingly more challenging when that farm is located in a war zone.  Think of the farmers in Iraq or Afghanistan whom have had to deal with the war, and grow food or raise animals at the same time?  Or think about what the Rhodesian farmers had to deal with when it came to cattle thieves and ‘terrs’ attacking farms for food or loot? They implemented Bright Light operations, along with using range detectives, as part of their farm defense strategies. Their solutions to the problems were very interesting to say the least.

    The Israelis had a similar problem when trying to defend their farms, and the Haganah was their answer. I even talked about US ranchers and farmers dealing with thieves, indians and competitors during the Range Wars in the US back in the 1800’s.  All of these historical incidents required protecting farms and ranches, and there just isn’t a lot out there for farmers and ranchers to refer to for the defense.

   The latest drug war in Mexico spilling over the border and impacting farms and ranches in the US is also another reason why we should talk about this.  When ranchers are getting killed by armed thugs along the border, and the US is not providing enough man power or resources to protect these farms and ranches, well then discussions about the defense of farms becomes pretty relevant.

   Farms and Ranches are also a target for terrorism, and biowarfare attacks against food and livestock is a concern.  It takes planning and resources to ensure these vital national assets are getting the protection they need.  There are also problems with drugs on farms, with individuals trying to grow marijuana on crop and range lands, with the hopes that the farmer will not notice or worse yet, turn a blind eye because they fear the growers/criminals.

   So with that said, let me start off the conversation with a fascinating post at the Small Wars Council about the subject.  I provided a link, so if you would like to further research or contact the author of the original post, you can do so.  Also I would like to thank Cannoneer #4 for bringing this stuff up to my attention, and he has an excellent blog post about such things.

    I know one thing, having tracking skills along with some kind of combat arms background, would be a big help in the defense of these farms and ranches. Especially if farmers start contracting range detectives for such a thing. If the readership has any more resources for the defense of farms and ranches, go ahead and post that in the comments section or I will add it as an edit. –Matt

—————————————————————–

A Farmer At War

By Trevor Grundy and Bernard Miller

—————————————————————–

Rhodesian Farmers Defensive Arrangements

(from the Small Wars Council forum)

 I knew many Rhodesian farmers and have visited many farmsteads over the years. At every farm, defensive arrangements were made up to suit their particular situation and infrastructure. The following would be a general overview:

 1. Most farmers fitted hand-grenade grills to the outside of all windows. Doors leading outside were likewise security grilled.

 2. Many farmers built thick walls about a meter in front of bedroom windows to stop bullets, but particularly to deal with RPG 7`s. Beds were never placed against the outside walls of a farmhouse.

 3. It was usual to have a designated safe room within the farmhouse that could be defended until support arrived. Sometimes this was a central corridor that allowed the farmer to move into other rooms to attack those outside through the windows. In the loft or ceiling over the safe room, some farmers laid sand bags to deal with possible mortar attack.

4. Every farmhouse in a given area was linked by a radio system called “Agric Alert”. This allowed radio contact with other farmers who formed their own defence units, usually under the umbrella of PATU (Police Anti-Terrorist Unit), which would react to a call from one of their neighbours for assistance. Another means of alarm raising was the use of a signal rocket – The Agric-Alert system was not done away with after the war, such was the lack of trust in Mugabe`s promises. It performed admirably as well when dealing with criminal activity such as stock theft. The alert system arranged for all farmers to check in with each other at a given time in the morning and evening as a means of monitoring their status.

(more…)

Friday, March 19, 2010

Industry Talk: To Defense Industry, The Future Looks Uncomfortably Unfamiliar

     For traditional defense companies, the operative word is “non-kinetic,” another speaker asserted.

“We love our kinetic weapons, and we don’t want to let them go,” he said. “But the world is moving in a different direction.”

     Here’s the problem: Kinetic weapons only are useful in phases two, three and four of war. Gates is veering the emphasis to the fringes — to phases zero and one (prevention of conflict, interagency work) and to phases five and six (stabilization and policing).

*****

     I love articles like this, because looking into the future of an industry, takes analysis and synthesis.  You have to put all the pieces together, and create a picture of what you think will happen.  If you have a enough of these articles, you can start to gain a consensus with predictions.  You also hope that people aren’t just copying what everyone else is saying, and calling that prediction.

   With that said, I take all of these with a grain of salt, and enjoy the process.  From what I can deduct, I think organizations like the IPOA are gonna be very popular in this industry.  Because stabilization and policing is right at the top of the list with this industry, and if we continue to apply Kaizen to the way we do business, this industry will continue to gain.

   I also got the obvious hint in this article about what the big guys are reading. Andrew Krepinevich should be on the reading list for everyone here, if they want to make their own assessments.  If the big guys are reading it, and the thing is shaping policy because of what was said, I kind of think that our industry should keep up and get on the same track. – Matt

——————————————————————

To Defense Industry, the Future Looks Uncomfortably Unfamiliar 

April 2010

By Sandra I. Erwin

Once upon a time there was much anxiety in the defense industry about the Obama administration gutting the Pentagon’s budget.

Those worries have been allayed, for now. Defense is the only portion of the federal budget that the president sheltered from the axe.

So the industry is breathing a sigh of relief, sort of.

Yes, the budget is huge, but the industry still feels vulnerable. Executives fear that weapons systems that for decades have been reliably profitable are becoming obsolete. They see the Defense Department shifting into new areas of warfare, but are not sure how to reposition their companies to succeed in non-traditional markets. They also fret about the nation’s oncoming fiscal train wreck, and wonder when someone will make the tough choices.

The much-anticipated Quadrennial Defense Review was supposed to give the industry “planning tools” to strategize about the future of the business. But the review was mostly a disappointment for its lack of specificity. One industry official compared the QDR to the Soviets’ infamous five-year plans for economic development.

In boardrooms these days, corporate bosses are brainstorming.

(more…)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress